Thursday, September 13, 2012

Active U.S. Intervention to Syrian Conflict

The U.S. must respond in a way that furthers Ambassador Stevens' lifework rather than undermines it. He gave his life not only in America’s service, but also in the service, in his words, of building a Libya with the same kind of representative government that the U.S. enjoys. The best way to further that goal is to help the Libyan government dramatically improve its own internal security, to establish an interior ministry and a police force capable of stopping extremist violence against Sufi tombs, foreign consulates and fellow Libyans. …
The repercussions of these killings extend far beyond Libya. Calls for more active U.S. intervention to help the Syrian opposition will now be met with arguments that our efforts to help the Libyans were repaid by the killing of our ambassador. In fact, however, the lesson of this tragedy should be exactly the opposite. The instability and violence in Libya is due to many factors, but one of them is the difficulty of reestablishing order after months of conflict in a country awash with guns. That is precisely why it is important to stop conflict from breaking out if at all possible and to end it as quickly and decisively as possible once it has begun. The longer the Syrian conflict goes on, the more weight and power extremist factions on both sides will gain. Even after Assad falls, the violence we are now witnessing in Libya will seem tame by comparison.

I have been thinking two things; i) it may Al Qaeda try to hijack Syrian revolution, so they deliberately carried out the attack Libya so that US may not help Syrian revolution, so that FSA will accept Al Qaeda offer to help, so Syria will be Al Qaeda land, ii) or criminal Assad asked Al Qaeda do the job so that US may not help Syrian people, and Syrian will be infidels all kind of land laa laa. One or another way US stuck they have to help Syrian people out.